The rules committee needs to review this...

[htismaqe]

Let me preface by saying:

I don't care that the Chiefs lost. They aren't a good team and this play really had no bearing on the overall fact that they lost.

The rules committee needs to examine the rules surrounding blocked punts. A blocked punt is an EXTRAORDINARY play that happens just a few times a season for the entire league. So why penalize a team for making an extraordinary play?

It's unexplainable to me how, on a 4th and 12, it's possible for the punting team to fall on the ball short of the 1st down and GET A 1ST DOWN.

The solution is simple. Instead of making the touch rule apply beyond the LOS, make it apply beyond the 1st down marker. The punting team should only be able to get a 1st down if the ball is advanced beyond the 1st down marker.

[Simplex3]

Originally Posted by htismaqe

It doesn't matter if Ross touched it or not. The rule is stupid. A team should never be rewarded for getting themselves in a 4th and long situation and allowing a punt to be blocked on top of that.

...unless the other team is dumb enough to give it to them.

[Simplex3]

The thing I don't get is this:

1. There is a rule. It has been there for years.
2. The Chiefs player didn't understand the rule and did something stupid.
3. The Chargers players DID know the rule and took advantage of the situation.
4. The refs got the call right according to the rule.

Solution:

Have players that aren't so dumb on the Chiefs.

[bigcarson50]

It isn't just as simple as changing the rule.

The idea is that once the ball crosses the LOS, it has changed possession. That is why you don't need to make the line to gain if you recover.

This rule applies to FG's as well. (Does nobody remember Leon Lett on Thanksgiving day?) At the end of games or OT, teams often kick on a down other than 4th with 10/12 seconds or so, just in case there is a botched snap. You need a rule that defines when if ever a team can try another kick. That rule is when it crosses the LOS.

Also if you keep the general muff rule, but change the "you need to make the line to gain" what happens then, if on a windy day a guy fields a 7 yard punt and muffs it?

Editted for correct player.

[tk13]

I agree, Ross screwed up. I have no problem with that, but that's no reason not to discuss the validity of the rule. I think the spirit of the rule is kinda whacked out. We never actually had possession of the ball, yet lost possession of the ball on a 4th down play where the offensive team did not advance the football far enough to get a first down. That right there goes against the entire logic of offensive football.

[ptlyon]

Originally Posted by Simplex3

The thing I don't get is this:

1. There is a rule. It has been there for years.
2. The Chiefs player didn't understand the rule and did something stupid.
3. The Chargers players DID know the rule and took advantage of the situation.
4. The refs got the call right according to the rule.

Solution:

Have players that aren't so dumb on the Chiefs.

Don't know about the #3 part, but other than that, it sounds simplex3 to me!

[kregger]

Originally Posted by cdcox

I'm going to put aside the question of whether the rule is a good one or not for a minute.

Let's see. Len Dawson knew the rule immediately. Herm had to have it explained to him by the ref. There is a fundamental problem here.

There are a ton of quirky rules surrounding special teams play (you can fair catch a punt and get a free kick for a FG, you can return a missed FG, the blocked punt rule, all the rules about muffed punts, safeties on kickoffs, etc, etc).

The players on special teams have to know these rules instinctively. Give them a one pager of rules for each specific situation (kickoff, kickoff return, etc) to watch out for. Make it mandetory for them to review each of these rules before they take the field each week. These things come up far too often to ignore. This is a coaching issue plain and simple.

There is no excuse for Ross or the special teams coaches on this one. You have to know your situation and what actions are avaialble at any point on the field. On a blocked punt, there is no immediate need to grab the ball. It can be recovered in a liesurely manner. If you have a play great, but if you don't let the dang thing go, especially if you are anywhere near the LOS. That has to be an automatic response of someone on the punt block team.

Good call cdcox. The thread should end here. Al Michaels also knew immediately. Ross has to know the rules if he is on the field during punts and kicks.

[htismaqe]

Originally Posted by Simplex3

...unless the other team is dumb enough to give it to them.

You've completely missed the point.

[htismaqe]

Originally Posted by Shamrock

The solution is simple.

Educate players not to make a bonehead play by touching the ball when it is past the LOS.

Sour grapes from fans who are blaming long standing rules for their team's failure ..........

Perhaps some people here have problems with reading and comprehension.

I DON'T CARE THAT THE CHIEFS LOST.

I would have posted the SAME POST this morning if the roles had been reversed.

[htismaqe]

Originally Posted by bigcarson50

It isn't just as simple as changing the rule.

The idea is that once the ball crosses the LOS, it has changed possession. That is why you don't need to make the line to gain if you recover.

This rule applies to FG's as well. (Does nobody remember Leonard Little on Thanksgiving day?) At the end of games or OT, teams often kick on a down other than 4th with 10/12 seconds or so, just in case there is a botched snap. You need a rule that defines when if ever a team can try another kick. That rule is when it crosses the LOS.

Also if you keep the general muff rule, but change the "you need to make the line to gain" what happens then, if on a windy day a guy fields a 7 yard punt and muffs it?

There's a HUGE difference between a blocked punt and a muffed punt, anybody with two eyes and no football knowledge at all can see it.

[Calcountry]

Originally Posted by tk13

Not really. If you changed the rule so the ball cannot be retained by the punting team unless it goes past the first down marker... it would usually be a pretty blantantly obvious unless it was like 4th and 26 or something and the punter muffed it.

The most ironic part of this whole deal is that Lamar probably would've been all over getting this rule examined. You can't write that stuff, sad as it is.

And a day later, it still ticks me off. Finally had a momentum changing play to save our season destroyed because something like that. Only the Chiefs.

You're kidding. We would have been lucky to cash that in for a FG, that would have made it 7-6. The Chargers still had more than enough LT in them to kick our butts at that point.

[Calcountry]

Originally Posted by Shamrock

The solution is simple.

Educate players not to make a bonehead play by touching the ball when it is past the LOS.

Sour grapes from fans who are blaming long standing rules for their team's failure ..........

Should the rule be changed? Yep.

Would that have made a difference in the outcome of yesterdays game, Nope.

We would still have lost.

[Calcountry]

Freaky rules going in the San Diego SUPER Chargers favor this year: 2-0. Remember the "fumble" that was an incomplete forward pass?

[Hendrix68]

Lighten up, people.

Ross tried to grab the ball and he missed. It was coming at a bizarre angle.

I doubt one player in a hundred would have done anything differently.

The season was already all but mathematically lost by the SD game.

If you have to scapegoat anyone for another non playoffs season, look no further than the morons on the defensive line and in the secondary in that 4th qtr vs Cleveland.

[htismaqe]

Originally Posted by Hendrix68

Lighten up, people.

Ross tried to grab the ball and he missed. It was coming at a bizarre angle.

I doubt one player in a hundred would have done anything differently.

The season was already all but mathematically lost by the SD game.

If you have to scapegoat anyone for another non playoffs season, look no further than the morons on the defensive line and in the secondary in that 4th qtr vs Cleveland.

THIS ISN'T ABOUT THE CHIEFS OR THE CHARGERS.

This is about a rule that's counter-intuitive to quality football.

[Calcountry]

Originally Posted by tk13

I agree, Ross screwed up. I have no problem with that, but that's no reason not to discuss the validity of the rule. I think the spirit of the rule is kinda whacked out. We never actually had possession of the ball, yet lost possession of the ball on a 4th down play where the offensive team did not advance the football far enough to get a first down. That right there goes against the entire logic of offensive football.

So does giving an automatic first down to a team for illegal contact on a 3rd and 20 that is away from the play.